[washingtonismoney]

It's really not "Vegas" that's agreeing, it's the betting public. Vegas oddsmakers have no opinion on who should be favored and by how much, their job is simply to predict how the betting public is going to bet. I wouldn't give the betting public's opinion any weight.

This is a constant argument against betting lines, but a bad one.

If Vegas consistently set poor lines it would lose oodles of money. Since Vegas sports betting is a successful business, I think we can infer that they have some insight into how games will turn out.*

* (of course the exact lines have even less meaning to non-sports-betting fans. What we're interested in is the broad assessment. If SC beats Utah by 2, the basic thrust of Vegas's favor-SC-by-3 -- which was the opening line, by the way -- would be vindicated, even if some bettors lost out. And given the amount of surprise at Vegas's choice to favor SC by 3, the betting line was informative to some.)

[washingtonismoney]

It's really not "Vegas" that's agreeing, it's the betting public. Vegas oddsmakers have no opinion on who should be favored and by how much, their job is simply to predict how the betting public is going to bet. I wouldn't give the betting public's opinion any weight.

This is a constant argument against betting lines, but a bad one.

If Vegas consistently set poor lines it would lose oodles of money. Since Vegas sports betting is a successful business, I think we can infer that they have some insight into how games will turn out.*

* (of course the exact lines have even less meaning to non-sports-betting fans. What we're interested in is the broad assessment. If SC beats Utah by 2, the basic thrust of Vegas's favor-SC-by-3 -- which was the opening line, by the way -- would be vindicated, even if some bettors lost out. And given the amount of surprise at Vegas's choice to favor SC by 3, the betting line was informative to some.)